3292 replies to this topic

[DONTEATUS]

Skyeagle we need to give up on BR to even say that no Boeing went into the Shanksville is in its self Insanity ! BR may need professional  help !
No I`ll take that back Does need PROFESSIONAL HELP !

[skyeagle409]

DONTEATUS, on 27 November 2012 - 02:42 AM, said:

Skyeagle we need to give up on BR to even say that no Boeing went into the Shanksville is in its self Insanity ! BR may need professional  help !
No I`ll take that back Does need PROFESSIONAL HELP !

It is silly for him to claim that "no Boeing" crashed near Shanksville. The factual scoreboard reads like this:

United 93 evidence: 100%

BR: 0%

[Babe Ruth]

booNyzarC, on 26 November 2012 - 08:22 PM, said:

As painful as it is to review his ill-informed babble, I don't suppose you can bless us with a link to this supposed epiphany that Woody has discovered, or should I say invented?

Edit:  Never mind about the link, I found it.

He is, of course, completely wrong.  His reasoning is basically outlined in the following paragraph:



What he is saying here is basically that if ARINC sent the messages, they were received.  That's simply ridiculous, and he completely misinterprets the ARINC documentation in order to reach this embarrassingly incorrect conclusion.

No Boo, what he is saying is clearly stated.  You simply do not understand what he is saying, or disagree with it.

If I may paraphrase, both the ground stations and the airborne stations were in contact with each other electronically, whether messages went both ways or not.

If the ground and air terminals were NOT in contact with each other, the records would have appeared differently.

When this whole ACARS thing broke last year, I was neutral, simply because I have never used the system in my line of aviation.  I have read about it, and understand its usefulness for the air carriers, but had not used it and was not really familiar with it.

At the time I thought Stutts made some good and interesting points, and thus did not take a strong position.

Later research, and the testimony of the UA guy and his supervisor, seems to have clarified things.  Similar to a fax system, each end can be communicating with the other, EVEN THOUGH one end may not reply to the other with a text message.

[booNyzarC]

Babe Ruth, on 27 November 2012 - 02:38 PM, said:

No Boo, what he is saying is clearly stated.  You simply do not understand what he is saying, or disagree with it.

If I may paraphrase, both the ground stations and the airborne stations were in contact with each other electronically, whether messages went both ways or not.

If the ground and air terminals were NOT in contact with each other, the records would have appeared differently.

When this whole ACARS thing broke last year, I was neutral, simply because I have never used the system in my line of aviation.  I have read about it, and understand its usefulness for the air carriers, but had not used it and was not really familiar with it.

At the time I thought Stutts made some good and interesting points, and thus did not take a strong position.

Later research, and the testimony of the UA guy and his supervisor, seems to have clarified things.  Similar to a fax system, each end can be communicating with the other, EVEN THOUGH one end may not reply to the other with a text message.

Am I going to have to write another blog entry?  Working title:

Return to Sender

Part Deux

Yes, I suppose I just might decide to do that...

BR, after reading Woody's blog entry yesterday it was quite clear to me that he does not understand how ACARS works.  That came as no surprise though because he has been misinterpreting information related to ACARS for years now.  It is also clear that you don't understand how it works.

In an effort to help educate you, I'll try to get something written up by this weekend which explains and correctly interprets the data.

[Czero 101]

booNyzarC, on 27 November 2012 - 04:56 PM, said:

In an effort to help educate you, I'll try to get something written up by this weekend which explains and correctly interprets the data.

Kudos for that, Boony, but you DO know that it will be a wasted effort, right....?  






Cz

[skyeagle409]

Babe Ruth, on 27 November 2012 - 02:38 PM, said:

No Boo, what he is saying is clearly stated.  You simply do not understand what he is saying, or disagree with it.

You continue to rely on websites that are notorious for spreading disinformation and misinformation, and Woody Box hasn't a clue as to what he is talking about.

[booNyzarC]

Czero 101, on 27 November 2012 - 05:34 PM, said:

Kudos for that, Boony, but you DO know that it will be a wasted effort, right....?  






Cz

Well yes, but some others may find value in it.

[Babe Ruth]

booNyzarC, on 27 November 2012 - 04:56 PM, said:

Am I going to have to write another blog entry?  Working title:

Return to Sender

Part Deux

Yes, I suppose I just might decide to do that...

BR, after reading Woody's blog entry yesterday it was quite clear to me that he does not understand how ACARS works.  That came as no surprise though because he has been misinterpreting information related to ACARS for years now.  It is also clear that you don't understand how it works.

In an effort to help educate you, I'll try to get something written up by this weekend which explains and correctly interprets the data.

Well l'm looking forward to that Boo, because at this stage of the game it appears he and I understand ACARS far better than you do.

Considering your abysmal understanding of cellphone dynamics, and your seeming refusal to do so,  I am not optimistic that you will be able to fully grasp the ACARS dynamics.

[Czero 101]

Babe Ruth, on 27 November 2012 - 09:50 PM, said:

Well l'm looking forward to that Boo,

* ludicrous claim flatly contradicted by everything ever posted by this user and more delusional fabrications snipped for brevity *

I see you're back to your old moves again, BR...



Your memory must be dimming since these dance steps of yours are just as unimpressive (though very predictable) now as they always have been....








Cz

[skyeagle409]

Babe Ruth, on 27 November 2012 - 09:50 PM, said:

Well l'm looking forward to that Boo, because at this stage of the game it appears he and I understand ACARS far better than you do.

You, and Woody Box haven't a clue about ACARS. Case in point, did you post this?

Babe Ruth, on 26 November 2012 - 07:42 PM, said:

In the case of 93, the record shows that the airborne unit was still 'online', no matter whether messages were replied to or not.  It was still online and airborne after the time of the supposed crash at Shanksville.

Case closed!

Edited by skyeagle409, 27 November 2012 - 10:21 PM.

[Babe Ruth]

The ACARS system is an elaborate texting system, specifically tailored to the airline needs.

So, just as with the cellphone system, the ground based system is always in electronic touch with the mobile systems, as long as both systems are powered up, and the mobile system is within range of the ground system.

Even though the ACARS uses VHF and the cell system uses microwave, the same general protocols are employed.

As I travel from cell to cell, even though I do not transmit or receive a message or call, my unit is communicating with the ground system, and the electronic records reflect that fact.

That is the dynamic at play in this controversy.

Perhaps if the crew had powered down the ACARS, if that is even possible, then maybe the record would have been different.

[skyeagle409]

Babe Ruth, on 28 November 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:

The ACARS system is an elaborate texting system, specifically tailored to the airline needs...Perhaps if the crew had powered down the ACARS, if that is even possible, then maybe the record would have been different.

You have to understand that United 93 did not receive nor responded after it crashed.

Edited by skyeagle409, 28 November 2012 - 03:51 PM.

[Babe Ruth]

What I understand Sky, is that poor grammar and spelling often reflect poor thought processes.

[skyeagle409]

Babe Ruth, on 28 November 2012 - 07:42 PM, said:

What I understand Sky, is that poor grammar and spelling often reflect poor thought processes.

Irrelevant! Knowledge has priority, which you do not possess.

[DONTEATUS]

There is no value in the lack of understanding and the misdirection of Information ! Only the inability of a small few not to See the Facts ! 9/11 will be in our hearts for many years !